Reply With Quote
Very likely, unless he wants the max. It's up to the Spurs if they want Rose I think he would have strong interest in this team.
I don't see it in any fashion. He'll cost way too much and Parker isn't going anywhere. I second those who have mentioned Red .
Very likely, unless he wants the max. It's up to the Spurs if they want Rose I think he would have strong interest in this team.
I'd be all for Rose except for that weird disappearance from the team this season. Not sure where his head is. On the other hand, its the Knicks.
Spurs have zero interest in another washed up ball dominant player.
Good discussion here specially Chinook, about how they could make it work.
I don't really see him leaving the Clippers bc LA lifestyles and the money difference is huge. He even got amendments in the CBA to qualify for that supermax. I suppose some trade could make it work... Like Manu signed and traded then retiring... it would be a nice gift to Manu ...and you can give up some small Assets for him. Nothing is impossible when the parties involved want to make it happen so it's wait and see.
I wouldn't be concerned about Dijon. He's versatile, long enough to be a combo guard next to either HOF PG and both are older and injury prone. He would still play. He might be held back, but that happens often to younger players playing in a system until they are ready to take over. He could always request a trade of he wants to, but I think he'd still play enough for him to be happy enough.
His knees are busted too.Spurs have zero interest in another washed up ball dominant player.
A Dijon & Red back court off the bench will work, enough penetration & shooting, while Hanga at the swing man will provide some size on the perimeter.
Bull . Parker bailed those guys out.
He did say he wanted to play until he's 40...I think some of you are ignoring that Parker probably bought himself 5 more years as a Spur after that ridiculous 1st round performance, tbh
The Spurs have blown a playoff series lead 4 times in the last 5 years. What's your point?
I've heard that CP is an arrogant . Will not fit in well with Pop.
Here's my guess...Clippers deal to get Melo to LA with Paul. But they probably don't keep JJ or Blake.
That's probably the only thing that could maybe keep him in LAC...
But that's not really much different and kinda worst than what he's dealt with...not gonna compete for le
Same people that say CP3 has no shot leaving LAC or coming here are the same people who thought KD was staying in OKC tbh
I wouldn't pursue Chris Paul for max money. I'd develop Murray. I would fast track him, just like Tony Parker's career. I don't want Murray to have Chris Paul hanging over him like Parker had Kidd when the Spurs heavily recruited Kidd to come to San Antonio. The only drawback from the front office for developing Murray like Parker, is if he shows a lot, the Spurs will have to consider the potentially paying Murray a lot more coming out of his cheap rookie deal.
In my opinion, although I truly believe Pop loved George Hill, the real reason Hill was traded is because Pop (and RC) knew he didn't want to pay him the big $$$ coming out of his rookie contract, so they got a rookie contract reset with Kawhi, and basically got lucky.
In this scenario how much $$ is Paul leaving on the table?
120+ million.
If CP3 signed the max with SA, he'd still be leaving 53 million on the table.
So Chinook gave a good breakdown with the thought of Paul leaving 120M on the table??
That doesn't make sense to me
his endorsements also would be more if he stayed in laker land
Even more than MaNuTres suggested. That particular scenario had him taking $20 Million with a second-year option for pretty much the same. That's $145 Million less in guaranteed money. Don't know where his head is at, but I doubt it's there.
I've heard Chris' brother, Cliff, has a lot of potential too.
I gave a more robust one with him getting his full salary. But there's no way the Spurs can have Parker and Paul on the team at the same time with him getting a max deal and the team not having holes. , the above idea had Dedmon leaving a bunch of money on the table to re-up for a year.
Going under the cap kill depth if you don't mortgage your future to reacquire it. Doing it for three straight years would really hurt the team, especially if Paul doesn't give a discount.
Sometimes, there are players that won't get over themselves and are beyond coachable. As good as CP3 is, when push comes to shove, I doubt he can go through a learning curve. I'm surprised LMA was able to get through it tbh.
Well I appreciate your post due to your knowledge of the cap...I'd like to see the one you've done with him taking the max.
Even though it may seem like a long shot over the past couple years I think it's safe to say..expect the unexpected. It's tough to pre determine what's gonna happen due to not knowing how both sides truly feel. But I go back to Woj and what he said in July. I don't think anythings changed really since then..
If anything things have kinda worked out., CP3 has been eliminated from the first round..same story and drama swirling in the LAC air just like a year ago. If he was a lock to resign there wouldn't be speculation on what's gonna happen etc..
As for the Spurs...What if CP3 was the plan for 17-18' all along? Just like the Warriors planned on going after KD. Maybe Pau, Lee, Dedmond were given a wink wink on there reasoning of pretty much giving 1yr deals? Just a thought
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...70#post8935970
It's possible, but if the Spurs had planned on 2017 being the year, Parker would have taken a shorter contract.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
